The Illinois governor, Rod Blagojevich just did the unthinkable. This afternoon, the embattled democratic governor named Illinois lawyer and politician, Roland Burris as the person to fill President-elect Barack Obama’s vacant Senate seat. Obama resigned from the U.S. Senate after winning the Presidential election in November.

Illinois has been in the national spotlight since Blaogjevich was arrested earlier this month under corruption charges including suspicion of attempting to sell the vacant seat, or trade it for lucrative favors or positions for him and his wife Patricia. Impeachment proceedings are underway, and there have been bipartisan calls for his resignation. The Senate leadership has already stated that they would block any appointment made by the governor.

The Illinois Senator and second ranking democrat Dick Durbin, and Majority leader Senator Harry Reid are leading the way by obtaining signatures in a draft letter. The letter from the Democratic National Caucus demands the Blagojevich resign and not make the appointment to the Senate. It states that the senators, “would be forced to exercise our Constitutional authority … to determine whether such a person should be seated.”

Article I, Section 5 of the U.S. Constitution states; Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide.

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member.

The Illinois problem just became the nation’s problem, as Senator’s will have to answer to their own constituents as to how they allow this tainted appointment to serve the people of the United States. Do Americans really want a Senator who may have made “a deal” to get appointed? I’m not questioning Mr. Burris’ ethics, but it does start to stink when looking into his past campaign contributions to Blagojevich one of which was over $14,000. The point being, no matter who this governor would appoint, it will be difficult to separate the office from the taint Blagojevich brought on it.

This appointment is nothing more than a parting shot from a sinking governor, and is a blatant insult to Illinoisans and Americans alike. The taxpayers of Illinois deserve and need a special election. Any appointment of this seat from Blagojevich or his successor, will be ineffective and untrusted by people.

UPDATE:
Illinois Secretary of State, Jesse White released a statement saying, ” As I have previously stated publicly, I cannot co-sign a document that certifies any appointment by Rod Blagojevich for the vacant United States Senate seat from Illinois…”

This is a concise list of the undisclosed senate candidates mentioned in the complaint against Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich. Some of these “mystery players” have already admitted their contact with the embattled governor. Others are some “best guess” opinions based on what research I have done. None of these candidates have been accused of any wrongdoing.

Senate Candidate #1
Valerie Jarrett
Obama’s choice to fill his seat. Advisor A and B were negotiating for this choice.

Senate Candidate #2
Lisa Madigan
Leaked to Michael Sneed of the Chicago Sun Times to put pressure for Obama’s choice.

Senate Candidate #3
Jan Schakowsky
She speculates herself that she may be #3.

Senate Candidate #4
Deputy Governor Louanner Peters
Blagojevich considered this person “loyal” enough to give up the senate seat to him should impeachment be imminent.

Senate Candidate #5
Jesse Jackson Jr.
Announced at press conference the he is #5. Denies any wrongdoing.

Senate Candidate #6
J.B. Pritzker
Sneed “leaked” this name on Nov. 28, as being on a short list for the senate seat.
or
Blair Hull
Former Senate candidate who lost to Obama. Huge Blagojevich contributor. Has had several questionable links to the governor.

Today, in a “not so surprising” move the F.B.I. arrested Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich on federal corruption charges. What was unexpected, was the news that he was trying to sell the senate seat that Barack Obama left vacant to prepare for the presidency. The governor was taken into custody at his home, on charges of seeking bribes in exchange for Barack Obama’s former senate seat. The arrest of the Governor and his Chief of Staff, John Harris has sparked a storm of controversy, questions, and calls for the governor to resign or be impeached. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) has also called for special elections to fill the vacant senate seat.

“The General Assembly should enact a law as quickly as possible calling for a special election to fill the Senate vacancy of Barack Obama. No appointment by this governor could produce a credible replacement,” the Senator said.

Lt. Governor Pat. Quinn called for the Governor to resign today saying, “Do the right thing and step aside”. Lt. Gov. Quinn would succeed Blagojevich as governor, should he resign or be impeached.

Blagojevich’s arrest not only raises credibility concerns over who will take the senate seat. It challenges the credibility of anyone who has ever had dealings with the governor. This includes all of the Senate hopefuls like Lisa Madigan and Jesse Jackson Jr. the Lt. Governor Pat Quinn, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, and the current president elect, Mr. Obama himself, and his advisers. The Obama transition team denies having any discussions with Blagojevich about the senate seat for sale, and in fact some of the evidence against Blagojevich suggests that the Obama team was not going to “Pay to Play” this senate game with him.

However, Senior Obama adviser Axelrod said on November 23rd, “I know he’s [Obama] talked to the governor and there are a whole range of names many of which have surfaced, and I think he has a fondness for a lot of them.” It is thought that Obama would have liked to see Valerie Jarrett take his former seat.

This begs the question, “How did Blagojevich know that Obama or his advisers would not play, and why was he so angry about it”? The governer was secretly taped on Nov. 11 saying, “I don’t get anything [for appointing Jarrett], “Fuck him. For nothing? Fuck him!”

I am sure that in the coming days we will be learning more about who knew what and when. We will also witness the political wrangling and finger pointing that is common in Illinois. No doubt we will also see Blagojevich lie all the way to big house and try to hold on to his job proclaiming his innocence. I am also sure that impeachment proceedings will follow by the end of this week if there is no resignation.

In question of course is, who will now appoint Obama’s replacement in the Senate and how will that appointment be perceived in Illinois. Any appointment by Blagojevich or Quinn is suspect in my opinion. I agree with Senator Durbin (can you believe it), that a special election must be held to avoid any perception of corruption or the same old Illinois politics.

A special election also gives rise to the chance a Republican can take that senate seat and, given the current state of affairs, that canidate might just have a chance to win in the Democratic stronghold of Illinois and Chicago.

I have heard it said, that Illinoisians like their officials to be corrupt. Well maybe that’s true in Crook county and in Springfield, but I think it’s about time we restructure our leadership. People in this state are sick of the corruption and pay to play politics that is bleeding our state dry. It’s time for new ethical leadership in the Governors office, and in all of our represenatives and elected officials. The time to act is now. The time for ethical reform in the State of Illinois has never been more important and more obvious.

So, my McCain/Palin campaign lawn sign has been vandalized 3 times in the last week. I should have known better since I live in the home state of “The One” himself. Actually, I’m surprised it has lasted as long as it has, a whole two weeks so far. Alas, I digress. The subject of this post is not to talk about my woes, but to inform readers about the violent and radical activities from the left during this (dare I say) historical presidential election.

The number and magnitude of these “hate” crimes is on the rise as we near the election on Nov. 4th, and it is alarming. I call these people “Obama’s Minions”. These radicals that support him will, in my opinion will drive a wedge between the left and right in America that has not been seen since the 60’s. They will do anything to get thier radical brother elected. These leftist radicals are trying to recapture their glory days and hippy youth and it will be wrought with violence.

They profess to be champions of free speech, but at every turn the bias is deafening and the hipocracy is blinding. Have an opposing view, and you will feel thier rath and taste thier distain for any real debate as they degrade into street thugs and hate mongers.

So I plan to keep this post updated with links to the latest stories on the inter-web reporting on these acts of violence and vandalism.

Check back here often to see the latest reports-

GALAX, VA.– Mike Stevens says he and other Republican campaign volunteers were attacked on Monday when they were sprayed with pepper spray after an altercation with two people over campaign signs.

LONGWOOD, Fla.– The home of a Central Florida Republican headquarters manager was shot up and damaged over his support of Sen. John McCain, the man told police. “Democrats Far More Aggressive in Seminole County,” Victim Says.

PORTLAND, Ore. – Authorities have arrested two men after a Molotov cocktail was thrown at a 4-foot by 8-foot campaign sign for Republican presidential candidate John McCain in a southeast Portland yard.

MANHATTAN, Ny. – “Defendant grabbed the sign [informant] was holding, broke the wood stick that was attached to it, and then struck informant in informant’s face thereby causing informant to sustain redness, swelling, and bruising to informant’s face and further causing informant to sustain substantial pain.”

Good Morning America featured an interview by ABC’s Lisa Fletcher of several of the Vice Presidential nominee’s closest friends self-dubbed the “Elite 6”, which includes Sarah and five other Alaskan moms.

I think this video speaks volumes of what type of person Sarh Palin is in her personal life. Her friends say she “lives on caffine and white chocolate, hates cats, and is as honest as the day is long”.

This video was originally titled “3 of 4 Friends Won’t Admit Voting for Palin.” Of course, what would one expect on You Tube? I couldn’t find another one just yet so, I thought I’d correct the perspective on this one by reposting it here. Just ignore all the liberal propaganda garbage at the end.

What I find most admirable and telling about Sarah is the diversity of her inner circle of friends. Two the four women interviewed are are pro-choice. One admits to never voting for a republican in a presidential election. Another states that she will be voting for McCain and Palin, while the others are undecided or at least want to keep their decision personal. I wonder if Obama’s inner circle includes any pro-lifers or Republicans?

They all seem very happy to see thier good friend as John McCain’s running mate and cherish thier diversity.

False Internet claims and rumors fly about McCain’s running mate.

Sliming Palin

September 8, 2008

Summary

We’ve been flooded for the past few days with queries about dubious Internet postings and mass e-mail messages making claims about McCain’s running mate, Gov. Palin. We find that many are completely false, or misleading.

Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent. She didn’t cut it at all. In fact, she tripled per-pupil funding over just three years.

She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a “What if?” question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin’s first term.

She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She’s been registered as a Republican since May 1982.

Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president. She once wore a Buchanan button as a “courtesy” when he visited Wasilla, but shortly afterward she was appointed to co-chair of the campaign of Steve Forbes in the state.

Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska’s schools. She has said that students should be allowed to “debate both sides” of the evolution question, but she also said creationism “doesn’t have to be part of the curriculum.”

We’ll be looking into other charges in an e-mail by a woman named Anne Kilkenny for a future story. For more explanation of the bullet points above, please read the Analysis.Correction: In our original story, we incorrectly said that a few of the claims we examine here were included in the e-mail by Kilkenny. Only one of the claims – about the librarian’s firing – was similar to an item in that e-mail. We regret the error.

Analysis

Since Republican presidential nominee John McCain tapped Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate, information about Palin’s past has been zipping around the Internet. Several claims are not true, and other rumors are misleading.

No Cut for “Special Needs” Kids

It’s not true, as widely reported in mass e-mails, Web postings and at least one mainstream news source, that Palin slashed the special education budget in Alaska by 62 percent. CNN’s Soledad O’Brien made the claim on Sept. 4 in an interview with Nicolle Wallace, a senior adviser to the McCain campaign:

O’Brien, Sept. 4: One are that has gotten certainly people sending to me a lot of e-mails is the question about as governor what she did with the special needs budget, which I’m sure you’re aware, she cut significantly, 62 percent I think is the number from when she came into office. As a woman who is now a mother to a special needs child, and I think she actually has a nephew which is autistic as well. How much of a problem is this going to be as she tries to navigate both sides of that issue?

Such a move might have made Palin look heartless or hypocritical in view of her convention-speech pledge to be an advocate for special needs children and their families. But in fact, she increased special needs funding so dramatically that a representative of local school boards described the jump as “historic.”

According to an April 2008 article in Education Week, Palin signed legislation in March 2008 that would increase public school funding considerably, including special needs funding. It would increase spending on what Alaska calls “intensive needs” students (students with high-cost special requirements) from $26,900 per student in 2008 to $73,840 per student in 2011. That almost triples the per-student spending in three fiscal years. Palin’s original proposal, according to the Anchorage Daily News, would have increased funds slightly more, giving intensive needs students a $77,740 allotment by 2011.

Education Week: A second part of the measure raises spending for students with special needs to $73,840 in fiscal 2011, from the current $26,900 per student in fiscal 2008, according to the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development.

Unlike many other states, Alaska has relatively flush budget coffers, thanks to a rise in oil and gas revenues. Funding for schools will remain fairly level next year, however. Overall per-pupil funding across the state will rise by $100, to $5,480, in fiscal 2009. …

Carl Rose, the executive director of the Association of Alaska School Boards, praised the changes in funding for rural schools and students with special needs as a “historic event,” and said the finance overhaul would bring more stability to district budgets.

According to Eddy Jeans at the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development, funding for special needs and intensive needs students has increased every year since Palin entered office, from a total of $203 million in 2006 to a projected $276 million in 2009.

Those who claim that Palin cut special needs funding by 62 percent are looking in the wrong place and misinterpreting what they find there. They point to an apparent drop in the Department of Education and Early Development budget for special schools. But the special schools budget, despite the similar name, isn’t the special needs budget. “I don’t even consider the special schools component [part of] our special needs funding,” Jeans told FactCheck.org. “The special needs funding is provided through our public school funding formula. The special schools is simply a budget component where we have funding set aside for special projects,” such as the Alaska School for the Deaf and the Alaska Military Youth Academy. A different budget component, the Foundation Program, governs special needs programs in the public school system.
And in any case, the decrease in funding for special schools is illusory. Palin moved the Alaska Military Youth Academy’s ChalleNGe program, a residential military school program that teaches job and life skills to students under 20, out of the budget line for “special schools” and into its own line. This resulted in an apparent drop of more than $5 million in the special schools budget with no actual decrease in funding for the programs.

Not a Book Burner

One false rumor accuses then-Mayor Palin of threatening to fire Wasilla’s librarian for refusing to ban books from the town library. Some versions of the rumor come complete with a list of the books that Palin allegedly attempted to ban. The story is false on several fronts: Palin never asked that books be banned; the librarian continued to serve in that position; no books were actually banned; and many of the books on the list that Palin supposedly wanted to censor weren’t even in print at the time, proving that the list is a fabrication.

It’s true that Palin did raise the issue with Mary Ellen Emmons, Wasilla’s librarian, on at least two occasions. Emmons flatly stated her opposition both times. But, as the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman (Wasilla’s local paper) reported at the time, Palin asked general questions about what Emmons would say if Palin requested that a book be banned. According to Emmons, Palin “was asking me how I would deal with her saying a book can’t be in the library.”Emmons reported that Palin pressed the issue, asking whether Emmons’ position would change if residents were picketing the library. Wasilla resident Anne Kilkenny, who was at the meeting, corroborates Emmons’ story, telling the Chicago Tribune that “Sarah said to Mary Ellen, ‘What would your response be if I asked you to remove some books from the collection?’ “

Palin characterized the exchange differently, initially volunteering the episode as an example of discussions with city employees about following her administration’s agenda. Palin described her questions to Emmons as “rhetorical,” noting that her questions “were asked in the context of professionalism regarding the library policy that is in place in our city.” Actually, true rhetorical questions have implied answers (e.g., “Who do you think you are?”), so Palin probably meant to describe her questions as hypothetical or theoretical. We can’t read minds, so it is impossible for us to know whether or not Palin may actually have wanted to ban books from the library or whether she simply wanted to know how her new employees would respond to an instruction from their boss. It is worth noting that, in an update, the Frontiersman points out that no book was ever banned from the library’s shelves.
Moreover, although Palin fired Emmons as part of a “loyalty” purge, she rehired Emmons the next day, and Emmons remained at her job for two-and-a-half more years. Actually, Palin initially requested Emmons’ resignation in October 1996, four days before the public discussion of censorship. That was at the same time she requested that all four of Wasilla’s department heads resign. Palin described the requests as a loyalty test and allowed all four department heads to retain their positions. But on Jan. 30, 1997, three months after the censorship discussion, Palin informed Emmons and Wasilla’s police chief, Irv Stambaugh, that they would be fired. According to the Chicago Tribune, Palin did not list censorship as a reason for Emmons’ firing. Palin rehired Emmons the following day. Emmons continued to serve as librarian until August 1999, when the Chicago Tribune reports that she resigned.

So what about that list of books targeted for banning, which according to one widely e-mailed version was taken “from the official minutes of the Wasilla Library Board”? If it was, the library board should take up fortune telling. The list includes the first four Harry Potter books, none of which had been published at the time of the Palin-Emmons conversations. The first wasn’t published until 1998. In fact, the list is a simple cut-and-paste job, snatched (complete with typos and the occasional incorrect title) from the Florida Institute of Technology library Web page, which presents the list as “Books banned at one time or another in the United States.”

Closet Secessionist?

Palin was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party – which calls for a vote on whether Alaska should secede from the union or remain a state – despite mistaken reports to the contrary. But her husband was a member for years, and she attended at least one party convention, as mayor of the town in which it was held.

The party’s chair originally told reporters that Palin had been a member, but the official later retracted that statement. Chairwoman Lynette Clark told the New York Times that false information had been given to her by another member of the party after she first told the Times and others that Palin joined the AIP in 1994. Clark issued an apology on the AIP Web site.
The director of Alaska’s Division of Elections, Gail Fenumiai, confirms that Palin registered to vote in the state for the first time in May 1982 as a Republican and hasn’t changed her party affiliation since. She also told FactCheck.org that Palin’s husband, Todd, was registered with AIP from October 1995 to July 2000, and again from September 2000 until July 2002. (He has since been registered as undeclared.) However, the AIP says Todd Palin “never participated in any party activities aside from attending a convention in Wasilla at one time.”

There is still some dispute as to whether Sarah Palin also attended the AIP’s 1994 convention, held in Wasilla. Clark and another AIP official told ABC News’ Jake Tapper that both Palins were there. Palin was elected mayor of Wasilla two years later. The McCain campaign says Sarah Palin went to the 2000 AIP convention, also held in Wasilla, “as a courtesy since she was mayor.” As governor, Palin sent a video message to the 2008 convention, which is available on YouTube, and the AIP says she attended in 2006 when she was campaigning.

Didn’t Endorse Pat Buchanan

Claims that Palin endorsed conservative Republican Pat Buchanan for president in the 2000 campaign are false. She worked for conservative Republican Steve Forbes.

The incorrect reports stem from an Associated Press story on July 17, 1999, that said Palin was “among those sporting Buchanan buttons” at a lunch for Buchanan attended by about 85 people, during a swing he took through Fairbanks and Wasilla. Buchanan didn’t help matters when he told a reporter for the liberal publication The Nation on Aug. 29:

“I’m pretty sure she’s a Buchananite.” But in fact, she wasn’t.

Soon after The AP story appeared, Palin wrote in a letter to the editor of the Anchorage Daily News that she had merely worn a Buchanan button as a courtesy to her visitor and was not endorsing him. The letter, published July 26, 1999, said:

Palin, July 26, 1999: As mayor of Wasilla, I am proud to welcome all presidential candidates to our city. This is true regardless of their party, or the latest odds of their winning. When presidential candidates visit our community, I am always happy to meet them. I’ll even put on their button when handed one as a polite gesture of respect.

Though no reporter interviewed me for the Associated Press article on the recent visit by a presidential candidate (Metro, July 17), the article may have left your readers with the perception that I am endorsing this candidate, as opposed to welcoming his visit to Wasilla. As mayor, I will welcome all the candidates in Wasilla.

Palin actually worked for Forbes. Less than a month after being spotted wearing the “courtesy” button for Buchanan, she was named to the state leadership committee of the Forbes effort. TheAssociated Press reported on Aug. 7, 1999:

The Associated Press, Aug. 7 1999: State Sen. Mike Miller of Fairbanks will head the Alaska campaign chairman for Republican presidential candidate Steve Forbes, campaign officials said. Joining the Fairbanks Republican on the leadership committee will be Wasilla Mayor Sarah Palin, and former state GOP chairman Pete Hallgren, who will serve as co-chairs.

Still, after nine years, the truth has yet to catch up completely.

No Creationism in Schools

On Aug. 29, the Boston Globe reported that Palin was open to teaching creationism in public schools. That’s true. She supports teaching creationism alongside evolution, though she has not actively pursued such a policy as governor.

In an Oct. 25, 2006, debate, when asked about teaching alternatives to evolution, Palin replied:

Palin, Oct. 25, 2006: Teach both. You know, don’t be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important and it’s so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both. And you know, I say this too as the daughter of a science teacher. Growing up with being so privileged and blessed to be given a lot of information on, on both sides of the subject – creationism and evolution. It’s been a healthy foundation for me. But don’t be afraid of information and let kids debate both sides.

A couple of days later, Palin amended that statement in an interview with the Anchorage Daily News, saying:

Palin, Oct. 2006: I don’t think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn’t have to be part of the curriculum.

After her election, Palin let the matter drop. The Associated Press reported Sept 3: “Palin’s children attend public schools and Palin has made no push to have creationism taught in them. … It reflects a hands-off attitude toward mixing government and religion by most Alaskans.” The article was headlined, “Palin has not pushed creation science as governor.” It was written by Dan Joling, who reports from Anchorage and has covered Alaska for 30 years.

That E-mail Author

Switching gears: Almost 100 readers have written to ask us if the many claims made about Palin in an e-mail written by someone named Anne Kilkenny are true. We can tell you that Kilkenny is a real person. (She was quoted by the Chicago Tribune, as we said above.) According to the New York Times, she’s a Democrat. According to Kilkenny herself, Palin “has hated me since back in 1996, when I was one of the 100 or so people who rallied to support the City Librarian against Sarah’s attempt at censorship.”

We’re still analyzing Kilkenny’s claims, and we will be posting something on this soon.

Last night I watched one of the most compelling speeches I think I have seen in a very long time. I was thrilled to see Sarah Palin stand up to the liberal media, Barak Obama, and Joe Biden all in one fell swoop.

More remarkably, she may have been ad-libbing much of the speech due to a problematic teleprompter. Some sources claim there was no problem, while others are claiming the operator may have been inexperienced with a new machine. In any case, her delivery was exceptional and undeniably historic, as the first woman to be the Vice Presidential nominee for the Republican party.

She was poised and spoke as a true American, one who will be able truly lead reform in Washington. Any doubt that I had regarding her ability to rally people behind her, and lead a cause was erased with last night’s powerful speech.

From her remarks on special needs children, to her understanding of the global dangers facing us today, Sarah Palin will undoubtedly serve America first. I especially enjoyed the jabs at the inexperienced Presidential nominee and his bloviating side kick.

John McCain did well to pick her as his Veep, no matter how “last minute”. Captain Leadbottom can look forward to supporting a Republican ticket once more.